We would like to welcome Michael Wadkins as the next USPA North Central Regional Director. Wadkins was elected by the board of directors to serve the remainder of the current term.

Quote:

As one of the first proponents of the U.S. Parachute Team Trust Fund, Michael Truffer showed his support even after his passing. His partner Sue Clifton has presented a check of $400,000, which Mike left to the fund in his will.

I miss going, but can't really justify the $800 to $1000 a meeting it was costing me to go. Amazing that the BOD hasn't embraced the virtual telepresence that's been demonstrated.

Oh, I respect the cost of dollars and time required to attend. I only attended once, and had a few items that I was particularly interested at that time. It was a nice learning experience, but pretty much seen the elephant at this point. Jen Sharp did email me a few points. I may give a third hand info post from what she wrote.

It would have been easier, it's been brought up for nearly every session since around 2006? Glen Bangs was still prez when I first proposed it. Then last year, at least one BOD member (I believe it was two) and one person not on the board "let" outsiders see/hear closed sessions over Skype. I was present (outside the room) when it happened. Knowledge of salaries leaked out over Facebook.

One member of the board tried to skip the entire BOD process and Skype in only for a controversial session as well. Fortunately the board took a quick vote and decided that doing so wasn't permissible.

I've offered (several times) to fund USPA BOD meetings being streamed live. Nothing needs to come INTO the meeting, but membership (I believe) would benefit from seeing the process occur, and writing their BOD members. For example, a proposal was sneaked in under everyone's noses during this past session; it would have been nice to know about it more than 4 days before the session, and failing that notice, at least the membership could have known of the proposal before it was passed. I hope Jan and other BOD members are reading this thread. The live streams (archived for later viewing) of PIA was easy. No funding required. Membership will volunteer.

It would have been easier, it's been brought up for nearly every session since around 2006? Glen Bangs was still prez when I first proposed it. Then last year, at least one BOD member (I believe it was two) and one person not on the board "let" outsiders see/hear closed sessions over Skype. I was present (outside the room) when it happened. Knowledge of salaries leaked out over Facebook.

One member of the board tried to skip the entire BOD process and Skype in only for a controversial session as well. Fortunately the board took a quick vote and decided that doing so wasn't permissible.

I've offered (several times) to fund USPA BOD meetings being streamed live. Nothing needs to come INTO the meeting, but membership (I believe) would benefit from seeing the process occur, and writing their BOD members. For example, a proposal was sneaked in under everyone's noses during this past session; it would have been nice to know about it more than 4 days before the session, and failing that notice, at least the membership could have known of the proposal before it was passed. I hope Jan and other BOD members are reading this thread. The live streams (archived for later viewing) of PIA was easy. No funding required. Membership will volunteer.

I am reading this thread.

I believe the last time we tried this we wanted to have a hard wire internet connection and that came with additional (significant) fees.

You really can't depend on the hotel's wifi to be reliable enough for a live video stream. In LV, it was VERY spotty, disconnected all the time.

Perhaps, just an audio feed might work at first. But with a hard wire connection video is the way to go.

Unless you can give me remote point and zoom controls of the camera, we need a camera operator.

Years ago I used to bring a wireless router to set up a LAN so that it was easier to trade files. Before that we used the pass the thumb drive around technique.

Internet is much more convenient.

And the two BOD members that broadcasted the meeting via Skype are no longer on the BOD. BTW, salaries that are disclosed are also publicly available in the 990 submitted to the IRS. Why there is such a big issue about this at the meetings is a mystery to me.

Most of the plenary sessions are very boring. Sunday's is the one that is interesting. Committee meetings vary in intensity depending upon what issues are brought forward.

I definitely will support and help in any way to get the meeting live-casted.

I cast regularly (every 60 days) from various hotels in Vegas, using a 4G puck. Bandwidth is exceptionally small for 720p video. This is part of what I do, and USPA's been made aware of this for years. The issues are not in any way technological, and have not been technical for at least 5 years.

The membership would be plenty happy with a wide lens showing the entire BOD, a cam op is not necessary. The _only_ reason to not stream it is USPA not wanting to stream it. I've heard all sorts of reasons, and none of them make sense. Yes, it's an extra thing to turn off during closed sessions. it's as simple as an off switch, or a USB cable disconnect.

The biggest overall inconvenience for the plenary sessions, is where PowerPoints would be best shared with the viewing audience, and that can be done by pre-loading. Sessions like this are done every day, in the most remote places, all over the planet, via organizations significantly less capable than the USPA. Technology is in no way a barrier. If we can stream live video from a NASCAR vehicle doing 190mph around a track, we can certainly easily stream a bunch of DZOs sitting around a U-Shaped table.

New BSR: Effective May 1, all first-time skydivers in the U.S. must be 18 years of age.

Since age has nothing to do with safety "Basic Safety Requirements", maybe the BOD could write a new BSR to eliminate boiler room booking operations!! Ohhh! Has it been long enough that we can even joke about that?? Well, of course we can, this is a dropzone.com thread after all.

New Basic Safety Requirement: The use of any extendable or fixed-pole camera mount, attached or handheld, by a tandem instructor or tandem student is prohibited.

I have a picture clipped out of Parachutist from the late 80s, or early 90s of a tandem pair with pole mounted 35mm camera. Kevin Knoll and Damian Hrdlicka were tandem instructors. About time this practice was eliminated!

If someone wants to make the USPA feel a bit old fashioned, or get them feeling more competitive... remind them that in the last couple years, we hicks up in Canada with about 1/10th the members have had streaming of our CSPA AGM.

There certainly are members of the BOD that want to see the meetings streamed. It's unfortunate that we're well into the next century and the BOD can't find their way to taking technology on.

I've offered my efforts at no cost: -Secure online delivery of the IRM for Kindle/e-pubs, with background security so the docs can't be easily passed around/copied/printed. -Live Streaming of the BOD meetings

Neither have been taken. Yeah, CSPA seems to have a lot of this well in hand, but the CSPA doesn't seem to have the same kind of turf wars or personal agendas. Maybe that's a Canadian thing?

There's no point in trying to stream the meeting - no one could see anything that was happening due to the fact that the room is smoke filled, and all of the side deals happen in the shadows!

Good humor always has some truth in it... A majority of USPA BOD members have pulled some crap in those shadows that needs to be outed. The longer they refuse to acquiesce on the demand for more transparency. The more damage they'll do. Sticking a couple of cameras in the room won't detract from the meeting process one iota. It WILL show us exactly who is acting against the memberships' wishes, though. IMO, they've already done enough damage. This needs to happen.

In reality, the meeting is open and the board welcomes anyone who chooses to attend. Having streaming cameras in the room won't change anything in terms of board behavior. I would recommend that those who are inclined to watch the proceedings, should this transpire, pick up and read a copy of Roberts Rules so you understand how things work. There will be times, however, when we close the meeting to discuss individuals and/or disciplinary actions, and the cameras would need to be shut off for those sessions. Don't be shocked if that happens.

I believe we are transparent in our dealings. I personally have nothing to hide.

A majority of USPA BOD members have pulled some crap in those shadows that needs to be outed.

And you know this how? Do you know this as fact or are you assuming it? How many of the BOD members have talked to or even met? Have you ever attended a BOD meeting?

Sparky

No time this morning, Spark. You seem determined to pick a fight w/me, again. Have fun w/that... Below is a PM of mine in reply to someone else. Nope, never been to a meeting. Most of us can't. That's the whole point.

"USPA started leaving a bad taste in my mouth when they decided to no longer allow A-license cards to be accepted as licenses. They made a money grab. Their excuse that a few instructors weren't filling the cards out properly was exceedingly lame. It was a blatant money-grab, & was called so by a number of BOD members. I, & I'm sure many others, would've loved to see & hear the BOD members who pushed that measure through. Then, USPA decided to field their own Demo team, & aggressively push that team over other teams. Other Teams comprised of USPA members who spent decades building up their businesses in making Demos. That was such a foul pill that I wonder why revolution didn't break out right then & there.

Now, this move to increase a lifetime membership by 250%? I smell an attitude of entitlement @USPA. Govt. POSs sit back, & levy one theft after another on its citizens because they feel we're not ready to overthrow them, yet. Many USPA BOD members seem to think that they too, are a Govt. entity that can get away w/all sorts of garbage. I disagree. Rogue DZs function just fine w/o USPA. Their insisting on continuing to take detrimental actions to the sport will drive the membership to boycott USPA.

I've met a couple of USPA BOD members. They're both good guys. They both voted against the crap I cited above. Sticking a couple of cameras in the room at their meetings would show exactly which members are acting against the memberships' wishes, & who is fighting the good fight."

There certainly are members of the BOD that want to see the meetings streamed. It's unfortunate that we're well into the next century and the BOD can't find their way to taking technology on.

I've offered my efforts at no cost: -Secure online delivery of the IRM for Kindle/e-pubs, with background security so the docs can't be easily passed around/copied/printed. -Live Streaming of the BOD meetings

Neither have been taken. Yeah, CSPA seems to have a lot of this well in hand, but the CSPA doesn't seem to have the same kind of turf wars or personal agendas. Maybe that's a Canadian thing?Wink

Why do you need the Board's approval? If you're not going to be charging USPA anything, and the meetings are open to all members, why not just do it on your own?

In reality, the meeting is open and the board welcomes anyone who chooses to attend. Having streaming cameras in the room won't change anything in terms of board behavior. I would recommend that those who are inclined to watch the proceedings, should this transpire, pick up and read a copy of Roberts Rules so you understand how things work. There will be times, however, when we close the meeting to discuss individuals and/or disciplinary actions, and the cameras would need to be shut off for those sessions. Don't be shocked if that happens.

I believe we are transparent in our dealings. I personally have nothing to hide.

Randy Allison USPA Mideastern Regional Director USPA Vice President

This does not reflect on my opinion of you, I know that you are a stand up straight forward guy, but why is it that anytime I've asked how board members voted on a specific issue, I've received a response that has has told me a maximum of 3 peoples vote? No matter who I ask. It's been asked multiple times by multiple people of the BOD that all members votes be recorded as a member of record. Why doesn't this happen?